TYPES OF VERBS

LINKING VERB

These verbs link the subject to the subject complement. While the most common linking verb is to be, other verbs can work as linking verbs (also known as copular verbs).
In order to check if a verb is a linking verb, merely substitute it with the verb to be. If the sentence reads well, with no drastic change in the sense, the initial verb is a linking verb.

e.g. Africa is a large continent. (linking verb)
· "Africa" (subject) is linked to "a large continent" (subject complement).

e.g. Backpacking has become less popular. (linking verb)
· "Backpacking is less popular" – become can be substituted with the verb to be.
· "Backpacking" (subject) is linked to "less popular" (subject complement).

Other linking verbs, or copular verbs, are: to appear, to seem, to look (like), to sound (like), to feel, to taste (in the sense of having the taste of), to smell (in the sense of having the smell of) etc.
TRANSITIVE VERB

Transitive verbs require the presence of an object. They can be finite or non-finite.

e.g. Juggling three tennis balls and a chainsaw, the clown impressed the huge crowd.
· "three tennis balls" and "a chainsaw" are the direct objects of the verb "juggling"
· "the huge crowd" is the direct object of the verb "impressed"

MONOTRANSITIVE VERB

The classification is very clear for this kind of verb, as it only requires a direct object. There may be more than one direct object, but no indirect object, nor an object complement.

e.g. I love you. Investigators found the evidence. They are going to sell pirated copies of the CD.

DITRANSITIVE VERB

While the classification of this kind of verb can be misleading, a ditransitive verb is a transitive verb. However, it requires both a direct and an indirect object. There may be several objects, indirect and direct, but there must be at least one of each.

e.g. The human resources department sent me an insurance policy.
· me – indirect object
· an insurance policy – direct object

COMPLEX TRANSITIVE VERB

This kind of verb is a transitive verb that requires a direct object and an object complement or an adverb.

e.g. The judge found the plea outrageous (direct object + object complement).
· the plea – direct object
· outrageous - object complement*(see explanation below)

e.g. She sent the documents to the government.
· the documents – direct object
· to the government – adverb phrase

In the specific examples above, the verbs "find" and "send" are considered complex transitive verbs. This does NOT mean that "find" and "send" are always complex transitive verbs.

* One way to check if the word/phrase after the direct oibject is really an object complement is to try the following trick: 1) take the direct object and make it a subject...2) put the verb to be after it (conjugated)...3) use the object complement as a subject complement (adjective or noun)...if this makes a legitimate sentence, then you have just proven that the word "outrageous" is truly an object complement (in the first example). See below:

1) the plea... 2) the plea is.... 3) the plea is outrageous (S + V + SubCompl)

INTRANSITIVE VERB

Somewhat easier to identify than transitive verbs, intransitive verbs do not require an object nor a subject complement. A clause with an intransitive verb only requires a subject and the verb, however, an adverbial idea is often needed to complete the idea.

e.g. The students have read a lot this year (a lot = adverbial idea of quantity; this year = adverbial idea of time).

e.g. My parcel has finally arrived.

e.g. The participants ran a total of 42 kilometers (a total of 42 kilometers = adverbial idea of quantity).

PASSIVE VOICE & TRANSITIVITY

While a most respectable colleague and I have differed on this matter, I guess I have to hand it to him: VERBS, WHEN PLACED IN THE PASSIVE VOICE, MAINTAIN THEIR TRANSITIVITY. Still, like any strong-headed, red-blooded, “testosteronized” male, I would still like to put my “two cents” in for consideration. After all, it is my damn blog!

My argument:

When verbs are used in the passive voice, the direct object (DO) becomes the subject. If there is no DO, the verb loses its transitivity.

e.g. THE JANITOR SAW SOME KIDS IN THE HALLWAY. – ACTIVE VOICE
SOME KIDS WERE SEEN IN THE HALLWAY. – PASSIVE VOICE
Active voice:
- In the active voice, “the janitor” is the subject, governing the monotransitive verb (MTV) “see”.
- “see”, as any MTV, requires a direct object (DO), in this case, “some kids”.
- “in the hallway” is a prepositional phrase working as an adverbial phrase of place.
Passive voice:
- In the second example, “some kids” becomes the subject, governing the verb (number is important here - plural).
- “in the hallway” continues to be a prepositional phrase working as an adverbial phrase of place.
- WHERE IS THE DO? If a verb does not have a DO, how can it be transitive?
- My argument is that a verb with no DO loses its transitivity, making it an intransitive verb.

BUT…

My esteemed colleague’s argument:

Verbs do not lose their transitivity when placed in the passive voice.

Using the same example from above, his theory is only mildly convincing.

e.g. SOME KIDS WERE SEEN IN THE HALLWAY. – PASSIVE VOICE
Active voice:
We do not differ on the analysis of the active voice…,but…
Passive voice:
- In the second example, “some kids” becomes the PASSIVE SUBJECT, governing the verb, but still representing the DO.
- Yes, the passive subject has, essentially, two jobs within the clause. The passive subject, while working as a subject, will always represent an object (direct or indirect).
- Since there is an object, the verb maintains its transitivity.

The only way to carry out this kind of analysis is to revert back to the active voice.

Nevertheless, his argument becomes somewhat more convincing when the verb is a ditransitive verb (DTV).

e.g. THE ARMY ISSUED THE SOLDIERS NEW UNIFORMS. – ACTIVE VOICE
THE SOLDIERS WERE ISSUED NEW UNIFORMS. – PASSIVE VOICE
Active voice:
- In the active voice, “the army” is the subject, governing the ditransitive verb (DTV) “issue”.
- “issue”, as any DTV, requires a direct object (DO), in this case, “new uniforms”, and an indirect object (IO), “the soldiers” (The IO always receives the DO).
Passive voice:
- In the second example, “the soldiers” becomes the PASSIVE SUBJECT, governing the verb, but still representing the IO.
- “new uniforms” is still the DO. This is where his theory really does prove true. Any verb with an object must be transitive. Again, you can really only understand this by reverting back to the active voice.

I therefore concede defeat. Verbs in the passive voice maintain their transitivity.

OMITTING RPs & THE SC (THAT) CASE

Sometimes, all relative pronouns (RPs) and the word THAT as a subordinating conjunction (SC) can be omitted depending on the syntactical function (or lack of) within a clause (not within the sentence).

As we have seen in other entries to this blog, words like THAT, WHO, WHICH are often used as relative pronouns, while THAT is also used as a subordinating conjunction.

OMISSION OF RPs

RPs can be omitted when their syntactic function within the adjective (relative) clause is NOT that of a subject. That is, if the RP represents the OBJECT (objeto) or COMPLEMENT (predicado), it is possible to omit it.

e.g. THAT NEW FILE-O-FAX “THAT” YOU BOUGHT LAST WEEK HAS GONE MISSING.
- “that you bought last week” is the finite restrictive adjective clause. Within this clause, “THAT” represents the direct object of the verb “buy”, which is a monotransitive verb (MTV) that requires a DO.
- “You bought a new file-o-fax last week. It has gone missing” is the essence of the sentence, but, in the example above, “That new file-o-fax” is the subject for the verb phrase “has gone” (That new file-o-fax has gone missing). Thus, it cannot be the DO for “buy”. “THAT” takes the place of “that new file-o-fax” in the adjective clause.
- Finally, as it works as a DO in the adjective clause, it can be omitted:
“That new file-o-fax you bought last week has gone missing”

Let’s see an example in which the RP cannot be omitted.

e.g. SHE HAD NEVER MET A GUY “THAT” HAD TREATED HER WITH SUCH CLASS.
- “That had treated her with such class” is the finite restrictive adjective clause. Within this clause, “THAT” represents the subject of the verb phrase “had treated”.
- “He had treated her with such class and she had never met any guy like that before” is the essence of the sentence, but, in the example above, “a guy” is the object for the verb phrase “had met”. Thus, it cannot be the subject for “had treated”. “THAT” takes the place of “a guy” in the adjective clause.
- Finally, as it works as a subject in the adjective clause, it CANNOT be omitted. The following sentence does not make sense in English: “She had never met a guy had treated her with such class”. “That” in this case is necessary!

OMISSION OF SCs (THAT)

THAT as an SC can be omitted pretty much always. SCs usually do not have an explicit syntactical function within the subordinate clause. Their function is more related to the connection (subordination) to the main idea within the sentence, or to that idea to which it is subordinated. That is, it is possible to omit the SC in most cases.

e.g. THE COPS KNOW “THAT” THE CARTEL INVESTS MONEY AROUND THE WORLD.
- “that the cartel invests money around the world” is the finite noun clause working as the direct object (DO) of the monotransitive verb (MTV) “know”. Within the DO, “that” has no syntactic function. It is not the subject (the cartel), nor the DO (money), nor the adverbial idea (around the world).
- Finally, as it has no syntactical function, it CAN be omitted. “The cops know the cartel invests money around the world”.

Let’s see a case in which THAT as an SC can be omitted, but such omission may cause some ambiguity.

Theodore Bernstein lists three conditions in which the SC “that” should be maintained:

Bernstein,Theodore. Dos, Don'ts & Maybes of English Usage, Gramercy Books: New York. 1999. p. 217.

1) When a time element intervenes between the verb and a clause.

e.g. PHILLIP TOLD ME LAST WEEK THAT HE WAS PLANNING TO TAKE MONDAY OFF.
- The position of the adverbial time element "last week" separates the verb “told” and the direct object “that he was planning to take Monday off”
- It is possible to omit the SC, however, the sentence losses its flow.

2) When the verb of the clause is long delayed.

e.g. THE RESEARCH SHOWED THAT ANIMALS LIVING CLOSE TO BARREN AND DESOLATE AREAS DURING THE JURASSIC PERIOD TENDED TO BE CARNIVORES.
- The distance between the subject "animals" and its verb "tended" is so far that it is recommended that the SC not be omitted.
- It is possible to omit the SC, however, the sentence losses its flow.

3) When a second “that” can clear up who said or did what.

e.g. THE SOCCER PLAYER SAID THAT THE COACH HAD NOT BEEN FOCUSING ON THE YOUNGER PLAYERS’ PERFORMANCE AND THAT THEIR GAME HAD SUFFERED AS A CONSEQUENCE.
- Did the soccer player say that their game had suffered or was the suffering a result of what he said about the coach? The second “that” makes the sentence clear.
- The soccer player said two things 1) “the coach had not been focusing on the younger players’ performance”; and 2) “their game had suffered as a consequence”.

CONFUSING THAT (RP) & THAT (SC)

THAT can be a little confusing due to the fact that there is a THAT used for subordination (subordinating conjunction) and another, which is the relative pronoun.

THAT as a subordinating conjunction does not usually follow a noun; therefore it does not modify one. If THAT does not follow a noun, chances are it is a subordinating conjunction and not a relative pronoun.

e.g. I THOUGHT THAT YOU HAD LEFT.
- There is no noun preceding THAT, therefore it is a subordinating conjunction.

Another way is to check if THAT is a relative pronoun or a subordinating conjunction is to verify if the clause following THAT can be used as an independent clause (excluding THAT, of course).

e.g. I THOUGHT THAT YOU HAD LEFT.
- “You had left” can be an independent clause (excluding THAT); therefore, THAT is a subordinating conjunction.

Yet another way to check if THAT is a relative pronoun or a subordinating conjunction is to verify if the word THAT can be exchanged for the word WHICH.

e.g. I HAVE NEVER EATEN MEAT THAT WAS SO TENDER.
- I have never eaten meat WHICH* was so tender.

*NB: This is merely to check if THAT is a relative pronoun. It is not recommended for the sentence itself.

WHICH and THAT

WHICH and THAT are often confusing. Basically, WHICH is used when referring to the previous sentence (this often carries an abstract idea), while THAT usually refers to the previous noun.

e.g. HE DELETED THE PICTURE, WHICH UPSET ME.
- The fact he deleted it made me feel bad. (There is a tendency in English to use WHICH in non-restrictive adjective clauses)

e.g. HE DELETED THE PICTURE THAT UPSET ME.
- The picture upset me. (There is a tendency in English to use THAT in restrictive adjective clauses).

POSSESSIVE RELATIVE PRONOUN

Similar to quantities, possessive (genitive) qualities can be used together with a relative pronoun in the adjective clause. These are usually which (things) or whose (things and people).

e.g. WE HAVE A SPANISH STYLE HOUSE. THE EXTERIOR OF THE HOUSE IS WHITE.
- WE HAVE A SPANISH STYLE HOUSE, “THE EXTERIOR OF WHICH” IS WHITE.
- WE HAVE A SPANISH STYLE HOUSE, “WHOSE EXTERIOR” IS WHITE. This is more common in American English.

e.g. SHE HAS JUST BOUGHT A NEW CAR, THE COLOR OF WHICH I HATE.
- SHE HAS JUST BOUGHT A NEW CAR, WHOSE COLOR I HATE.

e.g. THE COMPANY HIRED A NEW SALES MANAGER, WHOSE ATITUDE IS QUITE A ANNOYING.
- When talking about people, it is not common to use “which”.

QUANTITIES IN ADJECTIVE CLAUSES

Some relative pronouns (usually, but not always, which—for objects, whom—for people) can be used together with expressions of quantity to create a non-restrictive adjective clause.

e.g. CALIFORNIA HAS A LOT OF VISITORS EVERY YEAR. MOST OF THEM GO TO DISNEYLAND.
- EVERY YEAR, CALIFORNIA HAS A LOT OF VISITORS, “MOST OF WHICH” GO TO DISNEYLAND.

e.g. I HAVE TWO COUSINS. YOU MET BOTH OF THEM.
- I HAVE TWO COUSINS, “BOTH OF WHOM” YOU MET.

Other quantifying relative pronoun combinations include:

some of (which/whom), many of (which/whom), none of, two of, half of, neither of, each of, all of, several of, a few of, a number of etc.

e.g. I TEACH SYNTAX TO OVER 300 STUDENTS, A FEW OF WHICH ACTUALLY ENJOY IT.

e.g. THERE ARE TWO WAYS AVAILABLE, NEITHER OF WHICH I LIKE.

e.g. THE PACK CONSISTS OF TEN BOOKS, EACH OF WHICH OFFER DIFFERENT INFORMATION.

PREPOSITIONS WITH RELATIVE PRONOUNS

It is common to use prepositions prior to the relative pronoun which (object of preposition). This cannot be done with any other relative pronoun.

e.g. I CLEANED A POOL IN WHICH THERE WERE TWO DUCKS AND A SHARK.
- “in which” represents “in a pool” in the adjective clause. When placing it to the front of the clause (where relative pronouns always are), the preposition is maintained.

Other common relative pronoun/preposition combinations include: through which, from which, with which, on which, out of which, on top of which, under which, into which, etc.
The preposition can be placed at the end of the adjective clause (informal use).

e.g. HE TOOK OUT HIS ROLEX, WHICH HE HAD PAID A FORTUNE FOR.
- This could be more formally structured – “He took out his Rolex, for which he had paid a fortune”.
- When the preposition is placed at the end, the relative pronoun may be removed – “He took out his Rolex, he had paid a fortune for”.

RELATIVE PRONOUNS

Relative pronouns are used to introduce an adjective clause. In English, they are who, whom, which, whose, that and Ø (zero). They always refer back to a noun, noun phrase, or a noun clause. In special cases, “where” and “when” can be used as relative pronouns.

e.g. THE PERSON WHO KNOWS MORE ABOUT THIS IS ABSENT.
- “who knows more about this” refers back to the noun phrase “the person”. “This” person is absent. Another person is present, but doesn’t know more about this matter.

e.g. THE PEOPLE WITH WHOM I WORK ARE NOT COMING.
- “with whom I work” refers back to the noun phrase “the people”. “These” people are not coming. Others are coming, but I don’t work with them.

e.g. MY CAR WASN’T RUNNING WELL, WHICH MADE ME HORRIBLY LATE.
- “which made me horribly late” refers back to the noun clause “My car wasn’t running well”. “This” made me horribly late.

e.g. DOGS WHOSE OWNERS LEAVE THEM IN KENNELS FOR HOLIDAYS GET LONELY.
- “whose owners leave them in kennels for holidays” refers back to the noun “dogs”. “These” dogs get lonely. Other dogs do not.

e.g. THE MONEY THAT I SPEND IS MINE.
- “that I spend” refers back to the noun phrase “the money”. “This” money is mine. Other money is not mine.

e.g. I COULDN’T HEAR A WORD Ø YOU SAID.
- “you said” refers back to the noun phrase “a word”. “This” word I could not hear. I could hear other words (from other people).
- This sentence could be different: I couldn’t hear a word “that” you said. The relative pronoun “that” can be absent because it is working as a direct object within the adjective clause.

e.g. SEVERAL BANKS WHERE SIMILAR SCANDALS HAD HAPPENED WERE INVESTIGATED.
- “where similar scandals had happened” refers back to the noun phrase “Several banks”. “These” banks were investigated. Others were not.
- Although “where” is usually an adverbial idea, sometimes it is used to describe (adjective idea) a noun that refers to a place, thus making it work as a normal relative pronoun.

e.g. 1963 IS THE YEAR WHEN J. F. KENNEDY WAS HOT IN DALLAS.
- “when J. F. Kennedy was hot in Dallas” refers back to the noun phrase “the year”. “This” is the year it happened. Not any other year.
- Although “when” is usually an adverbial idea, sometimes it is used to describe (adjective idea) a noun that refers to a time, thus making it work as a normal relative pronoun.

Relative pronouns can act as subjects in the adjective clause.

e.g. THE TELEPHONE THAT IS IN THE BEDROOM IS BROKEN.
- “that” refers back to the noun phrase “the telephone”
- The relative pronoun “that” is working as the subject of the adjective clause “that is in the bedroom”

When relative pronouns work as objects, they may be removed.

e.g. THE TELEPHONE (THAT) YOU BOUGHT IS BROKEN.
- “that” refers back to the noun phrase “the telephone”
- “that” represents the direct object of the transitive verb “bought”. The verb “buy” is an MTV that requires an object. Therefore, you bought “that” (the telephone).

SENTENCE FRAGMENTS

Quite a lot of errors in English are made with dependent clauses. When these are used with NO INDEPENDENT CLAUSE to support them, they become SENTENCE FRAGMENTS.

When the verb is not conjugated to concord with a subject, there is no sentence idea, but rather a FRAGMENTED IDEA, that is, a SENTENCE FRAGMENT.

e.g. SHAKESPEARE HAVING PUBLISHED HIS FIRST PLAY.
- “Shakespeare” is the subject
- “having published” is not a conjugated idea, therefore, this is a SENTENCE FRAGMENT.

A mechanism you can use to check if the verb is conjugated to concord with the verb is to simplify the two parts.
- “Shakespeare” can be changed to the pronoun “I”, and “having published” can be changed to the verb “speak”. For this to work, you must maintain the same form for the verb, that is, “speaking”.
- “Shakespeare having” = “I speaking” - It is easy to see that this is NOT A SENTENCE in English, because the verb is not conjugated to concord with the subject. Thus, you can verify if subjects that appear to have a verb really have one.

There are two ways to correct the error (sentence fragment) above:
- “Shakespeare published his first play” - alter the verb to concord with the subject;
- “Shakespeare, having published his first play, became a household name” - use the sentence fragment as a dependent clause and write a different main clause, thus making this a complex sentence.

ADJECTIVE COMPLEMENT

When used, these complements always follow adjectives. They provide necessary support for the adjective to complete its meaning, and can be NOUN CLAUSES or PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES. Not all adjectives require a complement.

e.g. RETAILERS SEEM EAGER TO PROMOTE SALES.
- “to promote sales” (required noun clause reduced by the infinitive) complementing the adjective “eager”

e.g. YOUNG CHILDREN ARE OFTEN AFRAID OF THE DARK.
- “of the dark” (required prepositional phrase) complementing the adjective “afraid”.

e.g. THE AWARD MADE HIM FEEL PROUD [OF HIS ACCOMPLISHMENT].
- “[of his accomplishment]” (not required prepositional phrase) complementing the adjective “proud”

ADVERBIAL CLAUSES OF PLACE

These clauses refer to the PLACE where the main clause occurred. Most adverbial clauses of place are introduced by the subordinating conjunctions WHERE or WHEREVER.

e.g. THEY WENT WHEREVER THEY COULD FIND WORK.
- “wherever they could find work” modifies the main clause in terms of place.
- “went” is an intransitive verb that usually requires an adverbial idea.

e.g. WHERE THE FIRE HAD BEEN, WE SAW NOTHING BUT THE BLACKENED RUINS.
- “Where the fire had been” modifies the main clause in terms of place.

WHERE can be misleading due to the fact it can be used as a subordinating conjunction in NOUN CLAUSES.

e.g. THE POLICE NEVER FOUND WHERE THE MONEY HAD BEEN HIDDEN.
- “where the money had been hidden” is the direct object of the transitive verb “find.” Therefore, it is not an adverbial clause of time, but rather a finite noun clause working as a direct object.

WHERE can also be used as a RELATIVE PRONOUN.

e.g. THIS IS THE DEPARTMENT WHERE WE DEAL WITH CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS.
- “where we deal with customer complaints” is qualifying the noun phrase “the department.”
- As “the department” is a vague idea, the clause in question is restricting it. With this, it is a finite restrictive adjective clause.

And, WHERE can be used as a COORDINATING CONJUNCTION.

e.g. HE WALKED UP TO THE IMMIGRATION DESK, WHERE HE BEGAN EXPLAINING THE MIX-UP.
- “where he began explaining the mix-up” does NOT describe “the immigration desk”, therefore, the word where is NOT working as a relative pronoun.
- “where he began explaining the mix-up” does NOT modify where “he walked”, therefore, it is not an adverbial clause of time.
- WHERE can be substituted by the word AND, thus proving it is working as a COORDINATING CONJUNCTION. “He walked up to the immigration desk, and (he) began explaining the mix-up).”

ADVERBIAL CLAUSES OF TIME

These clauses refer to the TIME that the main clause occurred. They are usually introduced by subordinating conjunctions that refer to time.

Some examples are:

AFTER she waxed her legs, she clipped her toenails.
I had never seen such a big one BEFORE I met you.
SINCE the caretaker left, we haven’t been able to tend the yard.
Ecstasy wasn’t available UNTIL the drug MDMH was discovered.
WHEN man gets to Mars, we will be old and gray.
AS SOON AS we get there, I’ll change the baby’s diaper.
I haven’t been to a roaring party SINCE my high school reunion.
WHILE her attention was momentarily adverted, I swiped some gum.
SOONER THAN you realize, you’ll be as tall as me.
*NO SOONER had the firms merged, (WHEN) I was fired.

*NB: This “complex subordinating conjunction”, when used in the initial position, requires the use of an “inversion”.

e.g. NO SOONER WILL YOU GET THE PROMOTION AND THE COMPANY WILL GO BELLY UP.

In inversions, the AUXILIARY VERB (will, in this case) is placed before the subject (you), as in question format. In the standard order, the sentence would be:

e.g. YOU WILL NO SOONER GET THE PROMOTION AND THE COMPANY WILL GO BELLY UP.

When can be misleading due to the fact that it sometimes works as a subordinating conjunction for noun clauses.

e.g. THE LADY AT THE CHECK-IN KNOWS WHEN THE PLANE IS SCHEDULED TO LAND.
- “when the plane is scheduled to land” is the direct object of the transitive verb “know”. Therefore, it is not an adverbial clause of time, but rather a finite noun clause working as a direct object.

And it (the word WHEN) can be a relative pronoun when it describes a noun that refers to time.

e.g. THE TOOK A RISK AT A TIME WHEN ALL HOPE WAS LOST.
- “when all hope was lost” is the finite restrictive adjective clause describing the noun phrase “a time”
- “at a time” is a prepositional phrase working as an adverbial phrase of time.

NON-FINITE ADVERBIAL CLAUSES OF TIME

It is common to reduce these clauses with the GERUND and the PAST PARTICIPLE.

e.g. WHEN CHOOSING YOUR WORDS, YOU SHOULD CONSIDER HER EMOTIONAL STATE.
- “When choosing your words” is the adverbial clause of time modifying the main clause “you should consider her emotional state.”
- “When choosing your words” has been reduced by the gerund. In a finite format, it would be “When you choose your words.”
- “When choosing your words”, therefore, is a non-finite adverbial clause of time reduced by the gerund.
- “When” is a subordinating conjunction that can be used together with the reduced form. Not all subordinating conjunctions are as flexible.

e.g. HAVING UNDERSTOOD THE METHOD, HE WENT ON TO FINE TUNE ALL THE DETAILS.
- “Having understood the method” has been reduced by the gerund. In a finite format it would be “When he had understood the method.”
- “Having understood the method”, therefore, is a non-finite adverbial clause of time reduced by the gerund.
- As you can see, it is possible to reduce perfect tenses using the gerund.

e.g. PLACED UNDER A MORE FLUORESCENT LIGHT, THE COLOR BECOMES MORE VIBRANT.
- “Placed under a more fluorescent light” has been reduced by the past participle. In a finite format, it would be “When the color is placed under a more fluorescent light.”
- “Placed under a more fluorescent light”, therefore, is a non-finite adverbial clause of time reduced by the past participle.

UNTIL x BY

These two ADVERBS OF TIME can be very confusing. UNTIL gives the idea of CONTINUITY. BY gives the idea that something will happen anytime “before, but no later than, the time reference”.

e.g. THE LAW REMAINS IN FORCE FOR ALL ELECTIONS UNTIL 15TH FEBRUARY THE FOLLOWING YEAR.
- “until 15th February the following year” shows that the law will CONTINUE in force TO THAT POINT IN TIME.

e.g. SHARKS WILL BE EXTINCT IN THE WILD BY THE YEAR 2007.
- “by the year 2007” gives an idea that “sometime before 2007 sharks will be extinct.” It is NOT CLEAR WHEN, but it is expected to happen “sometime” before the time reference.

ADVERBIAL CLAUSES - Finite & Non-finite

Adverbial clauses are a group of words with a verb that remit adverbial ideas (time, place, contrast, condition, manner, comparison, reason or cause, purpose, result or circumstance). Finite adverbial clauses usually contain a SUBORDINATING CONJUNCTION (see entry on SUBORDINATING CONJUNCTION), which makes it easier to identify. Non-finite adverbial clauses, however, hardly ever (almost never, almost) have a subordinating conjunction, making them more difficult to identify and more open to interpretation.

FINITE ADVERBIAL CLAUSES

Most finite adverbial clauses have a SUBORDINATING CONJUNCTION, which will aid in determining the adverbial idea.

e.g. DESPITE THE FACT (THAT) SHE SMELLS LIKE ROTTEN FISH, I LIKE HER.
- “Despite the fact (that)” is a subordinating conjunction used to show CONTRAST
- “Despite the fact (that) she smells like rotten fish” is a finite adverbial clause of contrast.
- “I like her” is the main clause.

NON-FINITE ADVERBIAL CLAUSES

Reducing adverbial clauses is common, but confusing. They can be reduced in three ways: GERUND, PAST PARTICIPLE, and INFINITIVE. When this occurs, quite often the SUBORDINATING CONJUNCTION is removed, thus leaving the sentence open to interpretation.

e.g. SORTING THROUGH ALL HER BELONGINGS, SHE FOUND THE OLD PHOTO OF HER FIRST BEAU.
- “Sorting through all her belongings” is a dependent clause that can be interpreted THREE ways:
1) “By sorting through all her belongings” (referring to the MANNER in which she found the photo) – non-finite adverbial clause of manner reduced by gerund; or
2) “Because she sorted through all her belongings” (referring to what CAUSED her to find the photo) – non-finite adverbial clause of cause (reason) reduced by gerund.
3) "As she sorted through all her belongings" (referring to the time she found the photo) - non-finite adverbial clause of time reduced by gerund.

e.g. HE TOOK UP ANTHROPOLOGY, STIMULATED BY OUR ENTHUSIASM.
- “stimulated by our enthusiasm” can be interpreted as “because he was stimulated by our enthusiasm” – non-finite adverbial clause of cause reduced by the past participle.

e.g. HE OPENED THE CRATE TO LOOK FOR THE DEED.
- “to look for the deed” can be interpreted as “so that he could look for the deed” – non-finite adverbial clause of purpose reduced by the infinitive.

CORRELATIVE COORDINATING CONJUNCTIONS

The main correlative coordinators are:

Either…or, / both…and, / neither…nor

The first element of these three correlatives (either, both, neither) determines the function—alternative, addition or negative addition—, while the second element (or, and, nor) contains ellipsis.

a)Either…or (EXCLUSION / ALTERNATIVE)

This correlative is extremely common in English and has the most flexibility in terms of positioning.

e.g. INITIAL POSITION - EITHER YOU SMOKED A CIGAR OR A FRENCH CIGARETTE.
- The subject and verb “you smoked” is the same for “cigar” and “French cigarette“ (Either you smoked a cigar or "you smoked" a French cigarette).

This is very common when the predicates (verb and complement/object) are equal for the subjects:

e.g. EITHER BOB OR PETER SMOKED A CIGAR.
- The predicate “smoked a cigar” is the same for “Peter” and “Bob“ (Either Bob "smoked a cigar" or Peter smoked a cigar).

Still, it may be used prior to the predicate when the subject is the same in the two independent ideas.

e.g. PRIOR TO VERB - YOU EITHER SMOKED A CIGAR OR A FRENCH CIGARETTE.
- The subject and verb “you smoked” is the same for “cigar” and “French cigarette“ (You either smoked a cigar or "you smoked" a French cigarette).

This can be prior to a verb or an auxiliary verb:

e.g. YOU EITHER CAN STAY OR GO.
- The subject and auxiliary verb “you can” is the same for the verb “stay” and “go“ (You either can stay or "you can" go).

Still, it may be used prior to the object/complement when the subject and the verb are the same in the two independent ideas.

e.g. POST-VERB POSITION - YOU SMOKED EITHER A CIGAR OR A FRENCH CIGARETTE.
b) both…and (ADDITION)

When adding two ideas, this correlative is extremely handy.

e.g. INITIAL POSITION - BOTH SHIRLEY AND GAIL BROUGHT A PAVLOVA TO THE PARTY.
- The predicate “brought a Pavlova to the party” is equal for the subjects “Shirley” and “Gail” (Shirley "brought a Pavlova to the party" and Gail brought a Pavlova to the party).

e.g. POST-VERB POSITION - SHIRLEY BROUGHT BOTH PAVLOVA AND JELLO TO THE PARTY.
- The subject and verb “Shirley bought” is the same for the objects “Pavlova” and “jello” (Shirley brought pavlova and "Shirley brought" jello to the party).

Although not so common in English, this correlative can be placed prior to the verb.

e.g. PRIOR TO VERB - GAIL BOTH DANCED AND DRANK AT THE PARTY.
- The subject “Gail” is the same for the verbs “danced” and “drank” (Gail danced at the party and "Gail" drank at the party).

c) Neither…nor (NEGATIVE ADDITION)

Considered a little formal in English nowadays, this correlative is only used for negative addition.

When the predicates (verb and complement) are equal for the subjects, the initial position is common.

e.g. INITIAL POSITION - NEITHER YOU NOR I ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RAIN.
- The predicate “to be responsible for the rain” is the same for “you” and “I” (I am NOT responsible for the rain and you "are NOT responsible for the rain").

This PRIOR TO VERB POSITION (and the POST-VERB POSITION) will invoke the use of an inversion* if the verb is repeated.

e.g. YOU CAN NEITHER BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RAIN, NOR CAN YOU BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THE THUNDER.
- The repetition of the verb structure “can be held” AFTER the negative coordinator “nor” invokes the use of an inversion (auxiliary verb is placed before the subject, like a question format).

However, when possible, ellipsis is more common.

e.g. YOU CAN NEITHER BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RAIN, NOR THE THUNDER.
- The subject and predicate “You can not be responsible” is the same for “the rain” and “the thunder” (“You can not be responsible for” is in ellipsis).

e.g. POST-VERB POSITION - IT RAINS NEITHER HARD, NOR DOES IT RAIN SOFTLY.
- The repetition of the verb structure “it rains” AFTER the negative coordinator “nor” invokes the use of an inversion (auxiliary verb is placed before the subject, like a question format).

e.g. NO VERB REPETITION - IT RAINS NEITHER HARD NOR SOFTLY.

There are other correlative conjunctions:

e.g. I DIDN’T WANT TO HURT YOU, BUT (RATHER) HELP YOU.
- "no(t)…but (rather)" shows ALTERNATIVE

e.g. SHE NOT ONLY SUED HER HUSBAND, BUT ALSO GOT CUSTODY OF THE CHILDREN.
- "not only…but also" shows ADDITION

* Inversions are common when this correlative is used in the initial position.

e.g. INITIAL POSITION - NOT ONLY DID* SHE SUE HER HUSBAND, BUT SHE ALSO GOT CUSTODY OF THE KIDS.

ELLIPSIS

One of the reasons the English language is so economical is the use of ellipsis. This technique is used only in coordination and is a very versatile tool for fine-tuning the language.

Ellipsis in English has a broad spectrum of possibilities, including ellipsis of the subject, auxiliaries, verbs, subject complements, direct objects, whole predicates (verb and complement), and even adverbials.

The main point to remember about ellipsis is that it can only be used for elements that are repeated in all coordinated clauses of a sentence.

e.g. THE FACTORY WORKERS, THE ADMINISTRATION STAFF AND ALL MEMBERS OF MANAGEMENT FILED A SUIT AGAINST THE COMPANY FOR DEFAULTING ON SALARIES.
- “filed a suit against the company for defaulting on salaries” is in ellipsis in the first and second clauses.

Without ellipsis, the sentence becomes long-winded and excessively repetitive.

THE FACTORY WORKERS FILED A SUIT AGAINST THE COMPANY FOR DEFAULTING ON SALARIES, THE ADMINISTRATION STAFF FILED A SUIT AGAINST THE COMPANY FOR DEFAULTING ON SALARIES, AND ALL MEMBERS OF MANAGEMENT FILED A SUIT AGAINST THE COMPANY FOR DEFAULTING ON SALARIES.

e.g. ITALIAN FOOD IS RICH, BUT NOT SO SPICY.
- “Italian food is” is in ellipsis in the second clause.
- Italian food is rich, but "Italian food" is not so spicy.

CONFUSION: If there is a possibility that ellipsis may cause confusion, it is not possible.

e.g. HE SENT INVITATIONS TO HIS FAMILY, FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES, BUT DIDN’T R.S.V.P.

HE SENT INVITATIONS TO HIS FAMILY, FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES, BUT "THEY" DIDN’T R.S.V.P.

Ellipsis in the first example above caused confusion regarding who didn’t reply ("he" or "those receiving the invitations").

COORDINATING CONJUNCTIONS

There are 3 main coordinating conjunctions:

AND BUT OR

Coordinating conjunctions are mainly used in compound syndetic sentences to link (coordinate) two or more independent ideas, as well as for the purpose of ellipsis (omission of terms to avoid unnecessary repetition). By using coordinating conjunctions this way, sentences are made shorter for objectivity. Grammarians argue over whether there is true ellipsis or mere joining of certain terms.

e.g. JOHN AND PETER DANCED THE TANGO.

This could be interpreted as “John danced the tango and Peter danced the tango”, thus proving the use of AND for ellipsis. However, this may be interpreted as the simple joining of two nouns, “John and Peter”. This may indicate that John and peter danced together. In syntax, this would then be considered a compound subject.

Others words may be used as coordinating conjunctions:

e.g. PRICING BABIES SOUNDS ODD, BUT IT IS BECOMING MORE COMMON WHEN PLANNING A FAMILY.
- “but” joins two independent clauses, but shows an idea of contrast between them
- The independent clause “Pricing babies sounds odd” is linked to the other independent clause “it is becoming more common”.

In the example above, “yet” could substitute the coordinating conjunction “but”. It (yet) would work as a coordinating conjunction for contrast, despite the fact that it is generally defined as an adverb. Other words that can function as coordinating conjunctions include: as well as, however, in addition to, together with, therefore, nor, while etc.

Coordinating conjunctions can only link ideas of equal nature (2+ nouns, 2+ verbs, 2+ clauses, 2+ phrases, 2+ dependent clauses, 2+ appositives etc). This connection is known as syndetic:

e.g. I LIKE PLAYING GOLF AND SOCCER.
- The noun “golf” is linked (coordinated) to the other noun “soccer” by the coordinating conjunction “and” (two nouns/direct objects are coordinated).

Another interpretation is that “I like playing” is in ellipsis in the second sentence, that is:

e.g. I LIKE PLAYING GOLF AND I LIKE PLAYING SOCCER.
Coordination is used for ellipsis to avoid such tiresome repetition (two clauses are coordinated).

Recalling that coordinating conjunctions can only link ideas of equal nature, in the first example two nouns were coordinated. In the second example, two clauses were coordinated.

e.g. IF TRAINEES WERE ALLOWED AND IF THEY KNEW WHAT TO DO, WE COULD GIVE THIS TASK AND OTHER NASTY JOBS TO THEM.
- The two dependent clauses “If trainees were allowed” and “if they knew what to do” are linked by the coordinating conjunction “and”.
- The two noun phrases (two direct objects) “this task” and “other nasty jobs” are linked by the coordinating conjunction “and”

e.g. THE EQUIPMENT AVAILABLE, COMPUTER MONITORS AND KEYBOARDS, WAS BEING SOLD AT VERY REASONABLE PRICES.
- The two appositives "computer monitors" and "keyboards" are linked by the coordinating conjunction "and".

e.g. THE JANITOR, THE CARETAKER, THE DOORMAN OR THE SUPERVISOR WILL HAVE TO COVER FOR THE GARAGE ATTENDANT NEXT WEEK.
- The noun phrase (subject) "the supervisor" is coordinated to the previous three noun phrases (also subjects).

SYNDETIC – common use of coordinators

In English, SYNDETIC coordination is possible when there are two ideas, but not so common if there are more than two. With three or more coordinated ideas, it is more common to apply an ASYNDETIC structure with a coordinator between the last two elements.

e.g. WE WENT TO PARIS AND MOSCOW. SYNDETIC USE
WE WENT TO PARIS AND MOSCOW AND STOCKHOLM. NOT COMMON*
WE WENT TO PARIS, MOSCOW AND STOCKHOLM. ASYNDETIC

* This is excessive use of coordinators in English. Young children often speak this way. “Today we played soccer and we painted flowers and we fed the rabbits and we went to mall and we had lunch at McDonalds and we…etc”. This is not desirable in English, especially written English.

ASYNDETIC – used to avoid using coordinators

This is more common in English due to the pure objectivity of the language. In sentences with more than 2 ideas, rather than repeat the coordinating conjunction, it is more common to use commas, semi-colons and full colons to shorten (see explanation of ELLIPSIS) ideas.

e.g. ASYNDETIC - Goulash is a Hungarian dish that contains paprika, sour cream, pepper, salt, curry and meat.
SYNDETIC - Goulash is a Hungarian dish that contains paprika and contains sour cream and contains pepper and contains salt and contains curry and contains meat.
The SYNDETIC example above shows the excessive use of the coordinator “and”, which, when used correctly, is referred to as POLYSUNDETIC (see below). In this case, an ASYNDETIC form is less repetitive and more objective.

POLYSYNDETIC

This is the excessive, but CORRECT USE of a syndetic structure (coordinators) aimed at causing an effect, usually of excessiveness (repetition, continuity etc.).

e.g. He just talks and talks and talks. (Non-stop talking)
The movie went on and on and on. (The movie was very long)
They always want ice cream or chips or to go to the park or to watch TV. (They always want something)

COMPOUND SENTENCES

Compound sentences are made up of at least two simple sentences. There must be at least two independent ideas, that is, independent clauses. A compound sentence occurs when independent clauses are linked by coordinating conjunctions.

e.g. I HAD THE SAME IDEA, BUT I DIDN’T WRITE IT DOWN.
- "I had the same idea" is an independent clause
- "I didn’t write it down" is an independent clause

Coordinating conjunctions are not included, that is, are not considered part of the simple sentences that constitute a compound sentence. They merely link two simple sentences, forming a compound sentence.